ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Media Center (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Movies and TV Netflix: Making a Murderer (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=297109)

Rausch 01-13-2016 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAGA45 (Post 12021799)

And Lenk....man that dude could easily be a hitman. Ice cold...just straight up ice friggin cold.

The ex-boyfriend always stuck out to me...

RINGLEADER 01-13-2016 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief (Post 12008117)
This documentary just hammers the fact that you should never ever talk to the police. They are liars and they do not have your best interests at heart.

It never ceases to amaze me how people fold right up when the police start going on about how they're trying to "help" and how they'll let others know how you cooperated or they'll go hard on you if you don't help.

Just say I want my lawyer.

cosmo20002 01-13-2016 01:15 PM

My biggest question...how in the **** is Brendan Dassey's original lawyer, Len Kachinsky, still allowed to practice law?

The guy has his investigator pull a detailed written confession, complete with illustrations, out of Dassey. When that scene started, I had to rewind it to confirm it was actually Dassey's own people doing this because I was sure it had to be the prosecution making him confess.

Then Kachinsky sends Dassey, with the written and illustrated confession, to talk to the prosecution--without Kachinsky even present. WTF?!
Never seen or heard of anything like it. Just ****ing bizarre.

KCUnited 01-13-2016 01:18 PM

It was telling when they brought up police training to get a confession and not necessarily the truth. Which is the overlooked fail in this whole thing is the disservice the state of Wisconsin did Teresa Halbach and her family by never properly investigating her murder. As a result, they're having to relive everything right now with all the buzz surrounding this docuseries.

Fire Me Boy! 01-13-2016 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmo20002 (Post 12023951)
My biggest question...how in the **** is Brendan Dassey's original lawyer, Len Kachinsky, still allowed to practice law?

The guy has his investigator pull a detailed written confession, complete with illustrations, out of Dassey. When that scene started, I had to rewind it to confirm it was actually Dassey's own people doing this because I was sure it had to be the prosecution making him confess.

Then Kachinsky sends Dassey, with the written and illustrated confession, to talk to the prosecution--without Kachinsky even present. WTF?!
Never seen or heard of anything like it. Just ****ing bizarre.

Not to mention that at the same time, the investigator was working for the prosecution in the Avery case. Conflict of interest much?

frankotank 01-13-2016 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frankotank (Post 12006576)
the key having no other dna on it other than averys...wow.
I think he could be guilty.... he could be. he could have done it. but...from what I've seen, if I was on the jury I'd have to say I have reasonable doubt, so I'd have to vote not guilty. how in the **** any of those jurors could sit there and honestly say they have no doubt is just beyond me! they didn't know of Avery's previous involvement with the victim....so what...there was enough evidence to provide doubt.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 12006743)
Never been on a jury before?

what's your point?

Evidence that is beyond reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence required to validate a criminal conviction.

that is the jurors duty.
so I'll say again.....reworded...how in the **** any of those jurors could sit there and honestly say they have NO reasonable doubt is just beyond me!

as a matter of fact it was discussed that initially it was pretty much split down the middle and that a couple of folks were total turds in their lack of participation and lack of entertaining any other concept other than GUILTY. too bad none of the folks that DID have reasonable doubt folded and went with the crowd. seems to me they failed in their duty. if you have a reasonable doubt...then you must vote not guilty. amiright?

hell the cops from the first wrongful conviction....their absolute and TOTAL participation would have been enough of a reasonable doubt for me. not to mention the lack of blood in either supposed murder scene.
honestly....I think he probably did it. but as a juror....I'm pretty sure I'd have doubt.

Fire Me Boy! 01-13-2016 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frankotank (Post 12024092)
what's your point?

Evidence that is beyond reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence required to validate a criminal conviction.

that is the jurors duty.
so I'll say again.....reworded...how in the **** any of those jurors could sit there and honestly say they have NO reasonable doubt is just beyond me!

as a matter of fact it was discussed that initially it was pretty much split down the middle and that a couple of folks were total turds in their lack of participation and lack of entertaining any other concept other than GUILTY. too bad none of the folks that DID have reasonable doubt folded and went with the crowd. seems to me they failed in their duty. if you have a reasonable doubt...then you must vote not guilty. amiright?

hell the cops from the first wrongful conviction....their absolute and TOTAL participation would have been enough of a reasonable doubt for me. not to mention the lack of blood in either supposed murder scene.
honestly....I think he probably did it. but as a juror....I'm pretty sure I'd have doubt.

Wasn't even split down the middle. According to the juror that was medically dismissed, when they initially started deliberations there were 7 that thought not guilty, 3 guilty, and 2 undecided. But the 3 that thought he was guilty were adamant, and possibly had their minds made up before the trial.

Perineum Ripper 01-13-2016 03:28 PM

That Dassey kid shouldn't be in prison..he had no clue what happened

The investigators would question him..he would answer with something they didn't like so they steered him with their questions and said what they wanted him to say

Was there a body in the fire pit
No
Are you sure
Yes
Don't lie to us. We are here to help. You seen a and or foot or head or arm in the fire didn't you
Yeah
Yeah what
I seen toes

Horseshit..that kid didn't see shit..he was sitting on his ass playing playstation or watching movies

Then his first lawyer was the most worthless rat faced **** alive..every time he smiled I wanted to kick a puppy

Fire Me Boy! 01-13-2016 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac459 (Post 12024262)
That Dassey kid shouldn't be in prison..he had no clue what happened

The investigators would question him..he would answer with something they didn't like so they steered him with their questions and said what they wanted him to say

Was there a body in the fire pit
No
Are you sure
Yes
Don't lie to us. We are here to help. You seen a and or foot or head or arm in the fire didn't you
Yeah
Yeah what
I seen toes

Horseshit..that kid didn't see shit..he was sitting on his ass playing playstation or watching movies

Then his first lawyer was the most worthless rat faced **** alive..every time he smiled I wanted to kick a puppy

Second one wasn't much better. They play 3 hours of his taped confession, but prosecution AND defense agree to not play the rest of the tape, including the part where he tells his mom he made it all up - that the investigators "got inside my head"?!?!?!

Perineum Ripper 01-13-2016 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy! (Post 12024290)
Second one wasn't much better. They play 3 hours of his taped confession, but prosecution AND defense agree to not play the rest of the tape, including the part where he tells his mom he made it all up - that the investigators "got inside my head"?!?!?!

I forgot about the part..his defense probably didn't watch the whole video himself

BigRedChief 01-13-2016 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frankotank (Post 12024092)
what's your point?

Evidence that is beyond reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence required to validate a criminal conviction.

that is the jurors duty.
so I'll say again.....reworded...how in the **** any of those jurors could sit there and honestly say they have NO reasonable doubt is just beyond me!

as a matter of fact it was discussed that initially it was pretty much split down the middle and that a couple of folks were total turds in their lack of participation and lack of entertaining any other concept other than GUILTY. too bad none of the folks that DID have reasonable doubt folded and went with the crowd. seems to me they failed in their duty. if you have a reasonable doubt...then you must vote not guilty. amiright?

hell the cops from the first wrongful conviction....their absolute and TOTAL participation would have been enough of a reasonable doubt for me. not to mention the lack of blood in either supposed murder scene.
honestly....I think he probably did it. but as a juror....I'm pretty sure I'd have doubt.

There was defntely reasonable doubt. No blood at the scene. 4 months later they find the evidence? Give me a break. He may be guilty but the cops totally ****ed this up. Just how did he kill her like they say he did without the blood being everywhere?

Swanman 01-13-2016 04:23 PM

I see that Kathleen Zellner has picked up Avery's case. She specializes in exonerations and has like 13 so far. Brendan's case was picked up by Northwestern so he is in good hands as well.

SAGA45 01-13-2016 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swanman (Post 12024375)
I see that Kathleen Zellner has picked up Avery's case. She specializes in exonerations and has like 13 so far. Brendan's case was picked up by Northwestern so he is in good hands as well.

YES!!!

I noticed the listing on Netflix as "Season 1"....so perhaps they will follow the exoneration proceedings as well. I want him out before either of his parents pass.

GloucesterChief 01-13-2016 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RINGLEADER (Post 12023927)
It never ceases to amaze me how people fold right up when the police start going on about how they're trying to "help" and how they'll let others know how you cooperated or they'll go hard on you if you don't help.

Just say I want my lawyer.

The only words you should say are:

"I plead the fifth and I want my lawyer."

Pleading the fifth isn't a sign of guilt, it is the smart thing to do.

stevieray 01-14-2016 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy! (Post 12024008)
Not to mention that at the same time, the investigator was working for the prosecution in the Avery case. Conflict of interest much?

"God I apologize...I keep thinking of the ribbon....."

I wanted to kick his ass so bad. So damn fake.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:35 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.